Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
How well dog blood tests find Leishmania infection depends on disease
By Mendonça, Ivete Lopes de et al.·Published in Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo·2017·Universidade Federal do Piauí, Brazil·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: The performance of serological tests for Leishmania infantum infection screening in dogs depends on the prevalence of the disease.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A study looked at how well different tests could detect Leishmania infantum infection in dogs, which can cause serious health issues. In areas with high disease rates, the tests struggled to tell the difference between infected and healthy dogs. However, some tests performed better than others, especially in identifying infections in lower prevalence areas. The findings suggest that while certain tests can be useful, their effectiveness varies depending on how common the disease is in the area.
People also search for: dog leishmaniasis symptoms · Leishmania testing for dogs · best test for dog Leishmania infection
Abstract
Dogs are considered the main reservoir of Leishmania infantum. This protozoan causes visceral leishmaniasis (VL), an uncontrolled urban zoonosis in Brazil. Serological tests and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) on peripheral blood were performed to identify infected dogs in scenarios of higher and lower prevalence of the disease (Teresina and Vitória). One-hundred infected and 57 non-infected animals from Teresina and 100 non-infected animals from Vitória were studied. Animal selection was not dependent on previous serology. The sensitivity (Teresina) and specificity (Teresina and Vitória) were as follows: indirect antibody fluorescence (IFAT) cut-off of 1:40 (IFAT 1:40): 96%, 18%, and 76%; IFAT 1:80: 90%, 33%, and 93%; direct agglutination test (DAT): 96%, 33%, and 98%; fast agglutination screening test (FAST): 93%, 68%, and 100%; immunochromatographic assay with a recombinant rK39 antigen (rK39): 88%, 74%, and 98%; enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA): 91%, 79%, and 98%; rapid dual-path platform test (TR DPP®): 98%, 60%, and 98%; and blood PCR: 29%, 93%, and 97%, respectively. In the high transmission area, none of the tests adequately discriminated L. infantum-infected from non-infected dogs. However, in the high transmission city, the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of FAST, DAT, ICrK39, ELISA and TR DPP® was high.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28591267/